Enshittification – a term coined by Cory Doctorow – refers to the systematic decline of online platforms as they prioritize profits over users. Doctorow describes it as:

“...a seemingly inevitable consequence arising from the combination of the ease of changing how a platform allocates value, combined with the nature of a ‘two sided market,’ where a platform sits between buyers and sellers, hold each hostage to the other, raking off an ever-larger share of the value that passes between them.”

Seeking’s Initial Promise

Initially, Seeking attracted tens of millions of users with its promise of connecting sugar babies and sugar daddies by providing online access to a vast dating pool. The platform made it easier than ever to find sugar partners, and for a time, it succeeded – until enshittification took hold.

Following in the Footsteps of Social Media Giants

Today, Seeking shares the fate of platforms like MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter. Multiple internal and external factors have contributed to its gradual deterioration, including:

• Persistent website bugs
• Nonsensical and poorly implemented new features
• Policies negatively impacting user experience
• Non-transparent customer service prioritizing rigid adherence to company policy at the expense of user satisfaction
• FOSTA-SESTA
• Misleading social media portrayals on TikTok and YouTube

Problematic Changes in Features

The degradation of Seeking can be seen clearly through a series of questionable UI decisions, such as:

• Removal of the allowance amount option
• Introduction of an unfilterable infinite-scroll feed
• Replacement of clear arrangement tags (NSA/FWB) with “True Love” and “Marriage Minded”
• Removal of useful filters (body type, net worth/income)
• Introduction of the completely useless filter by weight

Branding and policy changes

• Branding shifts, notably dropping “Arrangement” from its name and marketing in 2022
• Allowing online-only seekers, previously banned
• Prohibiting explicit mentions of financial support, cash allowances, or PPM, making these violations punishable by bans
• Ending the promotion providing free premium access for women with .edu emails (March 2025)

The Misconception Around FOSTA-SESTA

FOSTA-SESTA, enacted seven years ago, has created a myth that sugar sites face imminent shutdown or investigation. In reality, no major sugar sites have faced legal action. Platforms like SDM, Secret Benefits, and even explicit escort sites such as Eros, Tryst, and Leolist continue operating without interference from authorities.

The Damage of Misleading “Influencers”

Sugar-related content proliferates on TikTok and YouTube, often misleading newcomers. “Influencers” typically promise effortless sugaring without intimacy, driven by the pursuit of views rather than genuine advice. This misinformation has inundated Seeking with users harboring unrealistic expectations that generous patrons will financially support them merely for their existence.

A Clear Shift Away from Sugar Dating

Seeking openly clarified its intent years ago, explicitly stating that it was no longer a sugar dating platform. Discussing financial arrangements became a bannable offense, signaling a fundamental shift away from the platform’s original value proposition.

Consequences of Seeking’s Decline

Once highly effective and practical, Seeking’s value has plummeted. The rebranding, transactional relationship bans, and worsening UX/UI have collectively turned finding a sugar partner into a frustrating and time-consuming ordeal. Nineteen years post-launch, the platform now reflects a prolonged disregard for its customer base, alienating the very users it initially attracted.

Profit Chasing and the Inevitable Decline

The recurring great flaw of American capitalism – chasing profit without consistently delivering an excellent product/service – has predictably impacted Seeking. The advantage of pioneering a niche market eventually fades if continual user satisfaction isn’t prioritized.

For established SDs, membership fee differences are trivial; time is our critical metric. User tolerance for inefficiency varies, but inevitably frustration grows. Will we endure two hours daily over several months to find an SB, or will we depart sooner? Eventually, patience wears thin, driving users elsewhere and drastically shrinking the platform’s paying membership.

Exodus of Valuable Users

As user experience deteriorates and fears of arbitrary bans increase, the exodus is already underway. The departure starts from the top down – not strictly by wealth but similarly. Ultra-wealthy “whales” who can easily find partners offline leave first, followed by centimillionaires tired of sifting through subpar profiles. Decamillionaires soon follow, leaving Seeking as just another generic dating site – the precise endpoint openly declared by its owners.

The Search for a Viable Alternative

Previously, investing an alternative site seemed pointless. Creating a competitor from scratch might still be impractical, but acquiring and revitalizing an existing platform could now present a viable solution.